As Seen in Vanity Fair's August 2006 Issue!
As Seen in US News & World Report's September 11 Fifth Anniversary Issue!
As Seen in Time Magazine's September 11, 2006 Issue!
As Seen in Phoenix New Times' August 9, 2007 Issue!

Saturday, October 06, 2012

"Banned" From Theaters?

That's what the Troofers are claiming about this movie:

Offhand, I'd guess it's being banned for wooden acting and a laughable screenplay. The trailer sets an impressive record for TTFLOM (time to first lie or mistake); the opening words are "An Irreprehensible (sic) Attack on Humanity".

60 Comments:

Is it just me, or is the opening music ripping off 'Battlestar Galactica'? And the why are the 'fake' aircraft painted grey? Any cretin could tell you that if the government was behind it, the first thing they would do is have the aircraft the right colour. It all seems to be drawing on some of the silliest theories in the Truther arsenal, and that's saying something!

Truther movies are generally a bad idea for Truthers, because the whole idea lacks a coherent narrative. As long as one is 'just asking questions', or making a documentary like 'Loose Change', this fact can be ignored. Once one begins to make a work of fiction, however, one is forced to create a narrative, and once this process begins, the sheer foolishness of the Truther claims becomes apparent. Things that can be made to seem plausible in a scattergun documentary are revealed to be utterly ridiculous when played out in a work of fiction that is claiming to reconstruct a possible scenario - the scenario, in other words, proves to be impossible! What can be made to seem compelling in the realm of the abstract is shown to be ridiculous when rendered into bad fiction. To add to the woes of the filmmakers, there is no one 'Truther' narrative anyhow, and so a large body of Truthers will condemn it as black propaganda in any case. If I were a movie theatre owner, I should not touch it with a barge pole.

I'm talking about the trailer, which I have seen, and extrapolating from that. Now, trailers usually take the best bits of the movie, and are sometimes actually misleading because they imply a much better movie than the real thing (I speak from experience). The trailer is long enough, and well done enough, to give a fairly good idea of the content of the film.

Second, the fact is that the 'Truther' movement lacks a coherent narrative. Hence a film based on it will reveal this fact, as it must. It will (again, because it must) result in a narrative that cannot have taken place in the real world.

Of course, if I was able to see it, I would see it. And the last time someone said I shouldn't criticise something I had not read (a book in this case), I read it and concluded it was a great deal worse than I could ever have imagined.

Obviously, the statement "Truther movies are generally a bad idea" is a general statement (that's why it contains the word 'generally'); my reasoning for why this is so has already been laid out, namely that there is no single and coherent narrative. Because the story is not true, and all of these theories (I've been following this since 2003) are themselves incoherent, it therefore follows that any attempt to write a fictional narrative based on them will be itself incoherent. That second comment of mine was (as I thought I made clear), on why such a film, considered in the abstract, should not be made; it will inevitably be condemned by that part of the 'Truther' community that disagrees with it, and if my experience is anything to go by, it will then be condemned as black propaganda.

To refer to this film directly, if I read the trailer correctly, this film begins with the premise that the reason for the 9/11 attacks was for Bush and Co. to build an oil pipeline across Afghanistan; a pipeline that has not to my knowledge been built. That creates a problem right there. You then have a fairly elaborate plan involving taking the aircraft while in flight, putting them down at an airfield and taking the passengers off. I would really like to see this part of the film to find out what they postulate happened to the passengers after that. Also it is unclear whether or not the film supposes that the actual aircraft were used, or specially modified planes.

Actually, for all the above reasons, I would like to see this. It is also almost certainly hilarious.

Your demand for a single coherent narrative is obviously impractical when any prankster in the world can set up a website claiming extraterrestrial yetis from the future did 9/11 and so disrupt any movement narrative, no matter how coherent.

Have you considered the possibility that the reason the trans-Afghanistan pipeline has not yet been built is because the claimed oil reserves in Kazahkstan did not pan out?

The usual theory about the Cleveland Airport Mysteries passengers is that they were all loaded onto flight 93 and vaporized near Shanskville, Pennsylvania. Since the evidence for this is not very good, serious truth-seekers have paid little attention.

That there is not a single coherent narrative is a fact that makes the making of a fictional narrative a risky business (a bad idea). Now, without having seen the film, I cannot comment on certain key points in this. First of all, the dialogue in the trailer indicates the twin towers being hit by aircraft. Those who deny that aircraft hit the towers will of course reject it for that reason. The passengers being taken off and presumably killed is, as you have noted, generally rejected, with good reason. The fact that this film includes it seems to point to the idea that the aircraft were replaced (otherwise why?).

Now, one can applaud the film-makers for sticking to their guns. It would be so easy to put together another poor 'documentary' that is 'just asking questions'. Instead they have made a film that seeks to create a coherent narrative.

Of course, the problem is that by doing so they immediately make sure that those who think it happened differently will have little if anything to do with them, and some of those will go so far, if the film is incoherent, to denounce it as black propaganda.

Which is why making a 'Truther' movie of this type is generally a bad idea.

The level of acting is of course hard to judge from a trailer, but it reminds me of my days as a member of a university amateur dramatics club. The bit-part players and extras are particularly wooden.

Another aspect that interests me is the characters who are pictured apparently realising they have been duped. I would like to know if they all get assassinated at the end of the film. In reality one of them would have used the internet on 9/11 to report their suspicions.

The bottom line is, when you get down to having to lay out specifics, as to who did what and how, there is only a mass of speculation. Discounting the obviously silly (space aliens, the summoning of some dark force from the nether world, etc.), you still have a wide variety of ideas.

Now, I cannot claim an exhaustive knowledge of these things, but to my mind the whole thing seems to be (again, on the evidence of the trailer) based on a version of the conspiracy that was popular some years ago, but is not any more. There is another problem - conspiracy theories move on, while even a bad movie takes time to script, shoot and edit.

There's another way to invent a coherent fiction: start with your desired ending (like "He's a hero! Hooray!") and invent a linear account of incidents to supporting that outcome, and invent a lying plot twist that explains why you alone survived to tell the tale.

Of course lies in your coherency are a liability, but if you get people emotionally attached to you and if you can get them to libel your critics, you may get away with it for a few years.

Well, I see that everyone's favorite mentally ill unemployed janitor is babbling about his favorite 9/11 delusions. Let's see where to begin...

Oh I see, you were just talking about the trailer when you said "Truther movies are generally a bad idea." Thanks for making that clear.

Truther movies are a bad idea for the reasons cited above by Highland Host: once you create a narrative, you've got the ridiculous claims of truther appearing.

Even you, deranged liar that you are, understand how idiotic your beliefs sound. That's why you start squealing every time someone points out your belief in magic thermite and invisible elevator repairmen and the like.

The usual theory about the Cleveland Airport Mysteries passengers is that they were all loaded onto flight 93 and vaporized near Shanskville, Pennsylvania. Since the evidence for this is not very good, serious truth-seekers have paid little attention.

Right. All 9/11 truth claims have generally been ignored by serious people because they're all lacking in evidence. That's why you babble incoherently about "mysteries" that normal people understand are not mysterious at all.

There's another way to invent a coherent fiction: start with your desired ending (like "He's a hero! Hooray!") and invent a linear account of incidents to supporting that outcome, and invent a lying plot twist that explains why you alone survived to tell the tale.

Of course lies in your coherency are a liability, but if you get people emotionally attached to you and if you can get them to libel your critics, you may get away with it for a few years.

Aaaand there it is. I knew Brian's homosexual obsession with Willie Rodriguez would eventually make it into this thread.

Ian, I'm just pointing out that Willie R. ran away screaming and crying when I proved that his hero story was a lie, and he hasn't been back.

Brian, you've never proved that his story was a lie. You've just babbled incoherently about the man. The only thing you've proved is that you're a perverted homosexual who lust for Rodriguez.

And who cares if he hasn't been back? He's probably bored of wasting his time with you. I mean, you're a mentally ill unemployed janitor who lives with his parents and wears women's underwear. Nobody cares what you think. I just enjoy the hysterical squealing every time I remind you that the truth movement has failed and that you will never get the widows' questions answered.

Ian, I proved Willie's story is a lie. The death statistics prove it. If he saved hundreds on 39 floors, then hundreds or thousands more would have died on the 120-something other floors under the impact zones he could not reach.

The fact that Willie hasn't been back shows that he ran away squealing and crying after I bested him in the debate.

I doubt anyone can muster any lust for old Jiggle-cheeks Liberace-lips--certainly not I.

You have not proved anything else but your obsession and lust for him. Pretty clear for everyone to see.

The fact that Willie hasn't been back shows that he ran away squealing and crying after I bested him in the debate.

Your lie is pretty evident. Willie was back 3 times and posted on his way to Mexico, exposing you over and over. The only one that ran away from his questions was you. I do not remember Willie crying a single time, do you? please post your link to it. I do remember him exposing your lies...one by one, and how fun it was when you mentioned Jennete Mackinley, a deceased lady who was unable to speak for herself and willie put a barrage of emails proving you a liar. So much fun!

I doubt anyone can muster any lust for old Jiggle-cheeks Liberace-lips--certainly not I.

Sure Brian, even willie told you , "you will never kiss these lips". It must hurt you to be rejected so many times!

And I note your disgraceful glee about the widows' frustration

and I note your racism towards Latino's and also your lack of interest to contact Law enforcement, a funny stand from somebody asking for a new investigation!!! Oy Vei!

As Ian said, I will understand WR being uninterested after constantly pounding Brian Good everywhere. After 3 challenges and after Brian Good even refused to pick up the phone to debate him. After offering many times access to families and survivors and even Officers and the nutjob of Brian Good refusing every single time. It is obvious WR realized the waste of time to engage somebody kicked out from every group and every organization due to his obsession with him. Brian being ejected from Richard Gage's group for his postings here are an indication that even the people he claims to be close with, are keeping a distance from him (Brian Good).As Ian told you ( and I am sure many others in the truth movement as well) ...get help Brian, get help.

He hasn't exposed anything but his own inability to refute the fact that his hero story has always been a lie, and he's a fraud--he gets money by lying.

Janette MacKinlay told me she thought Willie was a phony--that he didn't seem to have suffered at all from 9/11.

Your silly charge of racism is noted. You think we should accept lies from a Puerto Ricans that we wouldn't accept from a white guy? Willie exploited the racism to the max with his "exploshuns" and his feigned incompetence with common prepositions of place. He speaks English just fine when he wants to,but when he wants to play the innocent janitor who's too dumb to be a liar, he puts on the Rickie Ricardo act.

I know you're trying to get me to say something homophobic, but I don't see the need for it.

BGS, I debated Willie right here as anyone can see, I proved that his hero story is a lie, and he ran away squealing and crying and didn't come back. If he ever dares to show his face in the Bay Area he knows what I will do. He said in 2007 that he was going to fly actual persons he single-handedly rescued out to San Francisco. He never did--because he doesn't have any.

Brian the liar said: BGS, I debated Willie right here as anyone can see,

All we can see is that you did not debated him. You ran away from all his questions and he answered yours. A debate is a 2 way exchange which you failed to respect. Any reader here can go back to the other threads and see for themselves that you squirmed every single time he showed up. He even called your home and you refused to pick up the phone. You are afraid.

I proved that his hero story is a lie, and he ran away squealing and crying and didn't come back.

As noted, He did not run away. The only one running away from questions that proved you lied in this very blog for years was you, Brian Good. He even exposed your emails were you claim to be petgoat. You probably never thought he was going to publish them.

If he ever dares to show his face in the Bay Area he knows what I will do.

You will do nothing but put on your panties and lipstick as Sabba noted.

He said in 2007 that he was going to fly actual persons he single-handedly rescued out to San Francisco. He never did--because he doesn't have any.

I remember that! you were scared to debate him and you said you will not face him because he is a charismatic latin hunk and you were a balding , aging idiot. It was posted numerous times here. Why will he go to the expense on flying the crew if you were going to be running away? you are afraid to face him in person and everyones knows that. He apparently has bigger ones than you for coming here and expose you for the liar you are. No wonder Richard Gage fired your ass.

Janette MacKinlay told me she thought Willie was a phony--that he didn't seem to have suffered at all from 9/11.

BULLSHIT, She is DEAD. She never told you such thing. You can claim anything but Willie posted actual e-mails that proves you wrong. You were exposed as a liar and an asshole for using a claim from a dead lady as an excuse to attack. You live in LALA-Land.

Brian Good, stalker wrote, "...BULLSHIT, She is DEAD. She never told you such thing. You can claim anything but Willie posted actual e-mails that proves you wrong. You were exposed as a liar and an asshole for using a claim from a dead lady as an excuse to attack. You live in LALA-Land."

So Brian "Poster child for Dunning-Kruger effect" Good has come full circle with his cowardice and depravity.

BGS, I debated him, and I kicked his jiggly ass. I provided the death statistics that proved that his hero story was a lie. He wanted to talk about everything but the fact that he is a fraud. He ran away.

Are you so dumb that you don't recognize that my statement that Willie is a charismatic latin hunk was a joke? Do you really think anybody would mistake old jiggle-cheeks for a hunk?

Brian Good the liar said: I didn't say I'd proven anything. I said Janette told me she thought Willie was a phony.

Janette was a friend of mine, and if you think I'd lie about what she said, that only shows your own depravity.

Janette WAS NOT a FRIEND of YOU. She was acquainted with you trough the SF9/11 Group. She thought you were erratic and with issues. You did not prove a thing about her being your FRIEND. She wrote to William and showed her admiration and even posed with him as posted before. Not an action from somebody who will think WR is a phony. You make no sense at all and using a dead person to further your attacks, no surprises though, is just what the truth movement is all about. No wonder Richard Gage fired your ass.

Janette was a friend of mine, and if you think I'd lie about what she said, that only shows your own depravity.

Brian Good the liar said:Are you so dumb that you don't recognize that my statement that Willie is a charismatic latin hunk was a joke? Do you really think anybody would mistake old jiggle-cheeks for a hunk?

Funny thing, you spent one year denying to IAN you ever said that here, and called everyone liars, when showed actual proof you did say it, you changed it to a"joke". Even Rodriguez posted an email from you saying you will not debate him face to face because you did not wanted to face a "charismatic latin hunk" because you were a hair losing, aging hippie" (hippie- my words).

Poor Brian. He's still squealing hysterically because Rodriguez is a hero and Brian is a failed janitor who lives with his parents and will never have his dream of being held in Willie's strong, heroic arms fulfilled.

Brian, if you're trying to pretend you don't have a homosexual obsession with Rodriguez, babbling about Liberace is probably not the way to go.

BGS, Janette was a friend of mine. You don't know what you're talking about. I was invited to her house many times.

Willie's alleged emails prove nothing. Willie lies about 9/11 and steals his glory from the dead. Nothing Willie says can be believed.

I never said in this forum that Willie was a hunk. In another forum I made a joke about Willie's charisma--knowing that anybody who actually knew Willie and actually knew me would know it was a joke.Willie's no hunk. He's a blob of walking manboob.

Brian Good the liar said:BGS, Janette was a friend of mine. You don't know what you're talking about. I was invited to her house many times.

She was not your friend. You never went to her house. Stop lying about her, she is dead.

Willie's alleged emails prove nothing.Proves she liked and admired him. Where is your proof she was your friend? none.

Willie lies about 9/11 and steals his glory from the dead. Nothing Willie says can be believed.

Apparently the 9/11 families and survivors do. They have been supporting him for 11 years now.

I never said in this forum that Willie was a hunk. In another forum I made a joke about Willie's charisma--knowing that anybody who actually knew Willie and actually knew me would know it was a joke.Willie's no hunk...

Sure you did, there are emails posted showing you did. Claiming is a joke now when your sexual aberration with WR has been noted by everyone- even Carol Brouillet- will not make your lie go away. Willie is your struting latin hunk. To late for you.

Brian Good the liar said: Willie's alleged emails prove nothing. Willie is a proven liar. He cannot be believed.

Alleged? funny you said that, When he has posted emails from you, you claim to have meant something else. He posts with his real name, and gives authority to be prosecuted if the emails are false, he provides the headers and also inside information. Contrary to you who cannot back at all you were even her friend.

How anyone aside from Kevin Barrett could regard him as charismatic is impossible to explain.

Brian Good the liar said:Willie's alleged emails prove nothing. Willie is a proven liar. He cannot be believed. He's a pathetic washed-up con man. There's nothing to prosecute. You're trying to get me to say something homophobic about old Liberace-lips.

Proof is everything. He proved he knew her and they had an exchange. She admired Willie.

You will not prosecute for the same reason you will not contact the Attorney General in NY. You are afraid Willie will use it right away against you and own you. So your only recourse is to babble your obsessions.

No wonder Carol said about you in the past: "In the group (SF9/11Group) are two psychologists and they both agree that his emotional obsession has blinded his rational thinking process"

She was right.

Reason why Richard Gage kicked you out of his group...after all the work you did for him...Oh boy Oh Boy

BGS, Janette told me she thought Willie was a phony. She was a very kind and tolerant person, and it wouldn't surprise me if she said something to Willie that he and his lying admirers exaggerated.

I have neither power to prosecute, nor interest. I have proven irrefutably that Willie's hero story is a lie, he ran away squealing and crying, and he hasn't been back.

Psychologists are famous for missing the obvious surface truths. No twisted motivations are necessary. I went after Willie because his lies discredited the truth movement. I went after him because he's a scumbag who steals his glory from the dead.

There's nothing to prosecute.

If I said that I said that about myself. Calling Willie out for a lying scumbag is not a crime because truth is an absolute defense.

She was a very kind and tolerant person...I believe that about her. She did not tell you to Fuck off.

...and it wouldn't surprise me if she said something to Willie that he and his lying admirers exaggerated.

The only asshole who brought her up here was you. Brian Good. Willie just proved your statements were false. In your case, you never proved she told you anything or even if she was really your friend...( She was not). Keep exaggerating your relationship with her as you did with Carol. Nobody believes you.

I have neither power to prosecute, nor interest.

EXACTLY

I have proven irrefutably that Willie's hero story is a lie, he ran away squealing and crying, and he hasn't been back.

Again you lied. William was back several times and laughed at you in the other threads.

Psychologists are famous for missing the obvious surface truths. No twisted motivations are necessary.Thanks for proving me right once again. You know I was close to the SF9/11 as I told you 2 years ago. I was part of some of the email exchanges. I give you that as a task. When Willie posted some of the emails I knew they were the real thing.

I went after Willie because his lies discredited the truth movement. I went after him because he's a scumbag who steals his glory from the dead.

False. You went after willie because you were in love with Carol Brouilliet and your fantasies with her were not returned by Carol. You flipped of any man she liked as a friend or activist, that is why you made lies about her, John Wright, Kevin Barrett, Willie and others.

You also attack him because as you claimed here in the past, he and his "followers" have closed all the doors for you, even with "employers" .

There's nothing to prosecute.

EXACTLY

Calling Willie out for a lying scumbag is not a crime because truth is an absolute defense.

Willie calling you a deranged sex predator/stalker is an absolute truth and also defense.

MGF, when did the 9/11 widows discredit themselves? When did 911truth.org discredit itself? You guys like to latch on to every action by every clown and claim that clown represents the truth movement.

I went after Willie because he is a liar and a fraud. There are millions of non-anglos I don't go after. I was an activist for UFWOC way back when.

BGS, the fact that you can make an unprovable claim about something you know nothing about as if you were a witness only shows your essential dishonesty and irrationality. Janette said she thought Willie was a phony. Nothing you can do or say can change that fact.

I showed that the death statistics prove irrefutably that Willie's hero story is a lie. 15,000 civilians evacuated the towers. About 100 civilians under the impact zones died--mostly stuck in elevators or slow to get down the stairs. There is no evidence to support Willie's claim that hundreds of people were trapped behind illegally locked fire exit doors waiting for him to come and rescue them. Not one 911 call, not one witness--nothing except Willie's self-serving testimony.

I went after Willie because he was a liar and a fraud. I warned Carol in the fall of 2006 that Willie's story did not add up. Like most truthers, she didn't want to hear it. I didn't lie about anybody.

You are reduced to taking my quote out of context because you can not support your claims otherwise. I can not be prosecuted for pointing out that Willie's hero story is a lie and that he is a fraud--because it's true.

MGF, when did the 9/11 widows discredit themselves? When did 911truth.org discredit itself? You guys like to latch on to every action by every clown and claim that clown represents the truth movement.

Well, we have yet to find someone in the truth movement who isn't a self-discrediting clown (just look at yourself, for insance), so I don't know what you want us to do.

Anyway, the truth movement is dead, so it doesn't matter.

And the rest of your post is the hysterical squealspam of a lunatic who is homosexually obsessed with Rodriguez and unable to deal with the fact that he wants nothing to do with a failure, pervert, and liar like you.

Poor Brian. He doesn't even address my points. He knows the widows have no questions and that he's a liar who wears women's underwear, and he can't stand being humiliated by someone half his age with far more success in life.